And it was in a completely unrelated article about Star Trek. And I tried so freaking hard to avoid the spoilers.

Sorry to hear that Dent. It also happened to me. While CBM does have some obnoxious types, the dude who has been spoiling the twist has been doing it for the past 3 days or so. He's special kind of troll....he's posting on EVERY single article about how Shane Black ruined IM3 and says to boycott the movie because the twist "ruins" the Mandarin. Apparently he wants "true fans" to hear his message, not "faux fans". He's like a terrorist troll....article bombing with spoilers. Pretty much every member is calling for an IP ban.

I think this is the most likely scenario. The fact that Tony has the shrapnel removed is nothing new, that was in the comics, and he was given an artificial heart. I am wondering if we will see something similar here. He may not have the arc reactor, but I think the Extremis virus will give him a direct interface to it.

However it's given me new thought to what Joss Whedon said after watching IM3, "Now what am I supposed to do?"

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

I thought Tony doesn't actually get infected with Extremis at all in this film.

I agree, and I do the same. To me spoilers are not a huge deal because it's like the Hobbit. I knew everything that was going to happen in that film, but seeing it on screen gives you a new perspective.

The only thing for me was last year, I knew Coulson was going to die, and I wish I hadn't have known that, so the impact would have been a little more. My wife was almost in tears when that happened.

I tend to avoid spoilers as best i can, but i could easily read the entire iron man 3 screenplay, and watch it and enjoy all the same, if anything i'd enjoy it more because the first time i see anything im always watching it for the plot and the plot alone and all the other excellent elements that go into a film just whiz past my head.

Sorry to hear that Dent. It also happened to me. While CBM does have some obnoxious types, the dude who has been spoiling the twist has been doing it for the past 3 days or so. He's special kind of troll....he's posting on EVERY single article about how Shane Black ruined IM3 and says to boycott the movie because the twist "ruins" the Mandarin. Apparently he wants "true fans" to hear his message, not "faux fans". He's like a terrorist troll....article bombing with spoilers. Pretty much every member is calling for an IP ban.

That ****-for-brains spambot "FuturePast"/"PastFuture" over at CBM (his choice of screennames says it all --- Foxphile ****er) doesn't even stop to realize that the movie is called "IRON MAN 3," not "Rise of the Mandarin" or some such. As always, Marvel Studios realizes that these films are about the heroes, not the villains. Shane Black created two (or more) compelling villains for Tony Stark, James Rhodes, and Pepper Potts to face off against. That's *all* that matters; *not* whether or not they're slaves to comic-book continuity.

Yeah but if you were REALLY afraid of spoilers you wouldn't be anywhere near an iron man 3 review or thread. At least Dent's qualm is legit because he was on an article about a completely different movie.

Honestly though when people start seeing a film that i don't want spoilt i tend to lessen my internet usage altogether.

That ****-for-brains spambot "FuturePast"/"PastFuture" over at CBM (his choice of screennames says it all --- Foxphile ****er) doesn't even stop to realize that the movie is called "IRON MAN 3," not "Rise of the Mandarin" or some such. As always, Marvel Studios realizes that these films are about the heroes, not the villains. Shane Black created two (or more) compelling villains for Tony Stark, James Rhodes, and Pepper Potts to face off against. That's *all* that matters; *not* whether or not they're slaves to comic-book continuity.

Remember FreedomForLife? The one who's saying that he already saw the movie and how the CGI sucks and it lacks action? Well he was at CBM the other day and made a Iron Man 3 Review article and he says the same thing there, funny thing is the trolls on that site that was so eager for this movie to fail believed him .. LMAO!!

__________________
If the person you're seeing ever asks the question "Who is Stan Lee?", promptly kick their ass to the curb.
-----------
Who the **** makes a movie and while planning it is like, "you know what this needs...is some Greg Kinnear."

I've never understood why SHHers go there, to be honest. I almost never do.

In CBM's defense, they're good at breaking news quickly. They're not scoopers themselves per se (even though they do get the occasional exclusive), but they just seem to bloodhound even the slightest bit of CBM news the instant it pops up anywhere on the Internets.

The "community" over there, however, makes 4chan look like a roomful of certified geniuses.

"We've always defined ourselves by the ability to overcome the impossible, and we count these moments. Those moments when we dared to aim higher -- to break barriers, to reach for the stars. To make the unknown known. We count these moments as our proudest achievements. But we lost all that, and perhaps we've just forgotten. That we're still pioneers, that we've barely begun and that our greatest accomplishments cannot be behind us -- because our destiny lies above us."

For what it's worth, I wish people would realize that even saying that a movie has a "twist" can potentially spoil things for people who want to go in fresh.

If you don't know a twist is coming you'll usually be surprised, but if you know there is a twist you'll often call it ahead of time because you're now expecting a twist and can figure if out. Sixth Sense would be a good example of that.

The cat is already out of the bag about the movie having a "twist". So there no goin back there. But please be careful about "talking around it" here. Folks are commenting on it in ways that are actually giving some unintentional info about what it may be.

"We've always defined ourselves by the ability to overcome the impossible, and we count these moments. Those moments when we dared to aim higher -- to break barriers, to reach for the stars. To make the unknown known. We count these moments as our proudest achievements. But we lost all that, and perhaps we've just forgotten. That we're still pioneers, that we've barely begun and that our greatest accomplishments cannot be behind us -- because our destiny lies above us."

That ****-for-brains spambot "FuturePast"/"PastFuture" over at CBM (his choice of screennames says it all --- Foxphile ****er) doesn't even stop to realize that the movie is called "IRON MAN 3," not "Rise of the Mandarin" or some such. As always, Marvel Studios realizes that these films are about the heroes, not the villains. Shane Black created two (or more) compelling villains for Tony Stark, James Rhodes, and Pepper Potts to face off against. That's *all* that matters; *not* whether or not they're slaves to comic-book continuity.

This.

In regards to the aforementioned screenwriting decision, I have two thoughts on the matter and other details.

1.) I am happy they did not include the magical rings on the Mandarin. Having them would disrupt the aesthetic that the studio has created for its solo films; allow me to explain. Whenever I see an Iron Man film, I see it with the knowledge that I will see Stark fighting tech-based villains. Or, when I see a Thor film, I know he will be fighting magic-based foes. The focus on the-elements?powers?abilities-of this relationship effects the genre (Iron Man being science fiction, Thor, fantasy.) Disrupting this paradigm would alienate the audiences, and worse, compromise the MCU. Now, the reverse works only in special films that have team ups (a la The Avengers.) Now, don't get me wrong: I have no problem with this in comics or other film adaptations; I would geek out seeing the Hulk take on Galactus, as teased by the Wachowski Brothers. But, when I see the MCU, I have some expectations and I would hate to them have them unfulfilled.

Now, let us pretend that I am wrong, and that for some unimaginable reason, the rings are crucial to creating the definitive Iron Man film. The other problem with using them is that they would take away from the Infinity Gauntlet. The MCU has been slowly building up to an epic confrontation with Thanos. Then, audiences will see something they've never seen before - a hand accessory that can rearrange time, matter, space, and reality.

But, if the rings were introduced, they would take away from the Gauntlet...which, again, would be detrimental. What is special about being able to rearrange matter when the Mandarin has a ring that can do that (And I know, the obvious response is, well, the ring could have the gem inside it! To that, I say...no.) In the comics, the rings, as they are, work fine, but onscreen...they would be terrible. I remember a while back, a poster claimed that each of the rings served as a transponder to the Mandarin's military equipment: each of them controlled a helicopter or something. Now, if that approach had been utilized with the rings, I would be fine with their incorporation, as they would not compromise the aesthetic, genre, and franchise.

2. The "Twist"

Having not seen the film, I cannot comment on it accurately; part of me wants to say that the premise has been used before ("The Reichenbach Fall," but, as a smokescreen). On the other hand, I actually like it, as it fits into the image that Guy Pearce has constructed for himself, in film (think of the Count of Monte Cristo.)

But, playing the Devil's advocate, let's focus on the perspective of the 1% of the complaining element that has read the comics from day one and considers the Mandarin to be the best villain ever conceived (with the social baggage jettisoned, of course.) My response to these complaints is simple: deal with it.

It is not an inflammatory comment, but a truth: one I have had to learn the hard way over the years.

When I was a child, Darth Vader was one of my favorite villains. He never took crap from anybody, was an awesome cyborg, in addition to being a terrific pilot. He carried a screen presence that has rarely been replicated. However, thanks to the prequel trilogy, the character irradiated and destroyed beyond any point of repair. It started with casting the kid from Jingle All The Way (and of course, having the narrative focus on him as a kid, was stupid, as well,) and then became worse in every conceivable way. In the end, the coolest cyborg attack hound was reduced to a sniveling, child-murdering douche who made Jason Todd look like as saintly as Batman.

I did not call for a boycott of the films or wish anything negative on the resultant parties; I took comfort in the fact that the original trilogy still existed, and I could ignore the prequels. Then, the studio decided to revise the films to meet this new continuity; I was slightly upset, until the studio had the kindness to release a DVD set containing the original, untampered films.

Thus, while I do not own the series on BD (nor have any plans to, as they do not contain the original edits,) I am fine. The character still existed in one medium where he was not destroyed. Thus, the community that is upset about the decision needs to realize that the Masterworks are not going anywhere. If the spoiler is true

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

it is better that the character not exist in the series

than be wholly destroyed as Vader was.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Aaron

"I've known since I first took over the series that I wanted to eventually have someone else pick up the hammer," says the writer. "It's kind of a time-honored Thor tradition at this point, isn't it? Going back to the days of Beta Ray Bill."

In regards to the aforementioned screenwriting decision, I have two thoughts on the matter and other details.

1.) I am happy they did not include the magical rings on the Mandarin. Having them would disrupt the aesthetic that the studio has created for its solo films; allow me to explain. Whenever I see an Iron Man film, I see it with the knowledge that I will see Stark fighting tech-based villains. Or, when I see a Thor film, I know he will be fighting magic-based foes. The focus on the-elements?powers?abilities-of this relationship effects the genre (Iron Man being science fiction, Thor, fantasy.) Disrupting this paradigm would alienate the audiences, and worse, compromise the MCU. Now, the reverse works only in special films that have team ups (a la The Avengers.) Now, don't get me wrong: I have no problem with this in comics or other film adaptations; I would geek out seeing the Hulk take on Galactus, as teased by the Wachowski Brothers. But, when I see the MCU, I have some expectations and I would hate to them have them unfulfilled.

Now, let us pretend that I am wrong, and that for some unimaginable reason, the rings are crucial to creating the definitive Iron Man film. The other problem with using them is that they would take away from the Infinity Gauntlet. The MCU has been slowly building up to an epic confrontation with Thanos. Then, audiences will see something they've never seen before - a hand accessory that can rearrange time, matter, space, and reality.

But, if the rings were introduced, they would take away from the Gauntlet...which, again, would be detrimental. What is special about being able to rearrange matter when the Mandarin has a ring that can do that (And I know, the obvious response is, well, the ring could have the gem inside it! To that, I say...no.) In the comics, the rings, as they are, work fine, but onscreen...they would be terrible. I remember a while back, a poster claimed that each of the rings served as a transponder to the Mandarin's military equipment: each of them controlled a helicopter or something. Now, if that approach had been utilized with the rings, I would be fine with their incorporation, as they would not compromise the aesthetic, genre, and franchise.

2. The "Twist"

Having not seen the film, I cannot comment on it accurately; part of me wants to say that the premise has been used before ("The Reichenbach Fall," but, as a smokescreen). On the other hand, I actually like it, as it fits into the image that Guy Pearce has constructed for himself, in film (think of the Count of Monte Cristo.)

But, playing the Devil's advocate, let's focus on the perspective of the 1% of the complaining element that has read the comics from day one and considers the Mandarin to be the best villain ever conceived (with the social baggage jettisoned, of course.) My response to these complaints is simple: deal with it.

It is not an inflammatory comment, but a truth: one I have had to learn the hard way over the years.

When I was a child, Darth Vader was one of my favorite villains. He never took crap from anybody, was an awesome cyborg, in addition to being a terrific pilot. He carried a screen presence that has rarely been replicated. However, thanks to the prequel trilogy, the character irradiated and destroyed beyond any point of repair. It started with casting the kid from Jingle All The Way (and of course, having the narrative focus on him as a kid, was stupid, as well,) and then became worse in every conceivable way. In the end, the coolest cyborg attack hound was reduced to a sniveling, child-murdering douche who made Jason Todd look like as saintly as Batman.

I did not call for a boycott of the films or wish anything negative on the resultant parties; I took comfort in the fact that the original trilogy still existed, and I could ignore the prequels. Then, the studio decided to revise the films to meet this new continuity; I was slightly upset, until the studio had the kindness to release a DVD set containing the original, untampered films.

Thus, while I do not own the series on BD (nor have any plans to, as they do not contain the original edits,) I am fine. The character still existed in one medium where he was not destroyed. Thus, the community that is upset about the decision needs to realize that the Masterworks are not going anywhere. If the spoiler is true

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

it is better that the character not exist in the series

than be wholly destroyed as Vader was.

this, this this this. Thank you sir, thank you. Nailed it.

__________________
Avvy by Kane

#UNITETHESEVEN

Hal: Were we ever truly friends?Sinestro: That’s the tragedy of all of this, Jordan. Hal, we’ll always be friends.